FAST convert to Divx or Xvid

[nerys]

Is there ANY way short of spending a gazillion dollars on a faster computer to increase the conversion speed from dvd vob files to AVI (divx or xvid) or heck even vcd or svcd would be acceptable.

Space is not an issue I have 4gig to play with.

To clarify let me describe the problem. in our family business we have video booths you put in a quarter you watch a movie. (I will leave it at that) suffice to say its legal and we have full support and permission to do this (we pay for the right to do this) anyway we want to get away from DVD Players (picky pain in the butt always failing consumes lots of power etc..)

I can replace to giant old style freezer sized wood cabinets with HALF of ONE cabinet and reduce power to 1/4th and reduce moving parts to ZERO. I found these neat little HDD Media Players. its a case with video out you stuff a Hard Drive in it and full it with movies music pictures etc..

anyway I get the ones that have SD card slots and found I can forgo the HD all together and just run them off 4gig SD cards.

They are able to read VOB files which is great problem is they are very PICKY about the vobs they will read and or the BITRATE they will tolerate from vobs and shrinking takes forever. (we change out 39 films a week!!)

but they usually play divx or xvid files without batting an eye.

I do not really need or want to "compress" it nearly raw is fine with me I have 4gig after all and most of the films are 90 minutes or less.

SO how can I QUICKLY convert said movie ? I seem to max out at 33fps even with all enhancements turned off.

High audio bitrate to reduce workload Mono CBR
Video original size anybit rate you want to 4000kbps (whatever is faster is what I want)
I do not care about quality with such a high bitrate quality should not be an issue on a 16inch screen

I need raw speed. but real time means 2.5 DAYS to convert all the films and that if there all short and I man the machines at all times.

Suggestions? any help would be greatly appreciated !! everything I read just keeps saying more cpu more ram more cpu more ram. there has to be a way to optimize this. a way to speed it up I do not need insanely perfect 700mb 2.5 hours movies (I am still blow away by how the heck they do that I have never gotten anywhere close to those results) but I do not care. I am going to convert a film use it for a week and throw it away for "next weeks" film.

Thanks!!!

[jagabo]

With VirtualDubMod and Divx 6.6.1 at its fastest single pass constant quality mode I get around 130 fps on my Core 2 Duo E6300. I didn't resize (I used the 16:9 DAR setting in Divx) and started with a 23.976 fps VOB file. I kept the AC3 audio intact.

In constant quality mode you get whatever quality you specify (via the quantizer value). The size of the file varies depending on how much time you allow Divx to encode. In the above test I used a quantizer of 3 which results in a little bit of macroblocking but you don't really notice it at normal playback speeds (this level of quality is better than you would see in most downloads). The average bitrate was around 2500 kbps.

[aedipuss]

it really depends on the size of the original movies. if you are talking full 8.5gb dual layer movies it's going to take lots of time to cut them by more than half. if they are more like 6gb when accounting for the movie only with 1 audio track then use dvdshrink and set it to output 3.9gb dvds to the SD cards. quick and fairly painless if you forgo the deep analysis mode. another fairly fast transcoder you can set to output 3.9gb dvds is convertxtodvd.

[mgh]

Use encoding preset 0 and single pass for the fastest possible encoding with DivX.

[nerys]

Woh settings and options that don't exist for me so were talking different software. Right now I use DrDivx 1.06 I drop the vob on the program and click encode. :-) super super easy I can do a full 8gig disc in just a bit faster than real time (80-85%) but I found the artifacting to be too much (it starts fantasting and starts to artifact shadow) when I change the quality to fast instead of fastest I lose some speed (90% real time) but the quality at 2000kbps 15fps is perfect.

I am trying to get 4:1 ie 2hr film in 30 minutes right from the dvd (eliminating the rip step) since none of these DVD's is ever encrypted or anything not even CSS.

Alas your getting those insane speeds because you using a nice processor. I am running an XP1800+

I am going to try it on my x64 3500 at home and see what improvement that gets me to see if its worth spending $600 to build a barebones Core Duo machine.

What software are you using and is there a tutorial on videohelp here you can link me to ? (they got some great toots here its just figuring out which one you need :-)

Can this software be batched? ie DROP a vob on it and have it spit out what I want on the other end ? While I can worm my way around Vdub I am not looking forward to teaching non computer savy people how to use it :-)

What the cheapest way (parts wise) to get a killer video conversion machine ? is it just a matter of the most expensive CPU I can afford or are there other factors ?

To see the settings I use if you have DrDivx goto www.nerys.com/stuff and grab the normal.dip file

Thanks so much for the help !! I really to appreciate it!

[guns1inger]

You have a simple choice. You can have it fast, or you can have it look good. You cannot do both.

Processing will always be slower from the DVD. It is much faster to copy the files to the HDD and process from there.

Video encoding is first and foremost a CPU intensive process. The biggest change you can make to increase speed is get a faster CPU. Anything else you do is making only very small incremental changes around the edges. If you want to seriously speed up encoding then you have to buy yourself a big, fast machine (COre2Duo or even Quad) with 2 GB memory and 3 fast HDDs. Put your system on one drive, your source on the second, and encode to the third.

There is nothing you can do to your current system that will make more than a couple of % difference that isn't going to make quality very low.

[nerys]

I am seeing that now. The xp1800 was encoding at about 97% of real time while my system at home (just an A64 3500) with 1.5gig ram is doing it at around 60-65% real time. thats 15+ less minutes per hour of video for conversion time. How much faster do you think moderate Core2Duo (say $150-$200 cpu) be over the A64 3500? I will still do it from the DVD since even the DVD read spead is faster than the encode speed and the time it saves in other steps is worth it. I will also not even encode to the HD right from the DVD to the SD card (it otherwise takes 12 minutes to copy the file to the SD card)

I tried it this way on the current machine and the performance hit was less than 5% (it takes a lot more than 5% to rip separate and copy to SD separate so its net gain in the end)

IE the time to RIP then Encode THEN copy to SD is greater by a lot more than the time to rip right from dvd direct to SD

Sure you can I want fast over looking good. thats why I am using high bitrates to compensate for the lower quality of speed. ie best of both worlds is possible if size of file is not a factor

Back to the hardware. I have noticed that the motherboard can make a pretty big difference in overall performance with the SAME CPU. is there an overall ideal motherboard to use with Core2Duo processors? any consensus on say "such and such" mobo tends to be good for these processors.??

Thanks again so much for the help!

[guns1inger]

Bitrate will not always compensate for hasty encoding.

[jagabo]

You have a simple choice. You can have it fast, or you can have it look good. You cannot do both.

This is only true if minimizing file size is your primary concern. In constant quantizer mode the quality is the same whether you pick the fastest settings (little or no motion search) or the slowest settings (lots of motion search). But the resulting files are smaller with slower settings.

[jagabo]

How much faster do you think moderate Core2Duo (say $150-$200 cpu) be over the A64 3500?

http://channel.tomshardware.com/2007/08/25/cpu_charts_channel/page22.html

I have noticed that the motherboard can make a pretty big difference in overall performance with the SAME CPU.

Unless there's some configuration problem the motherboard will make very little difference for VOB to Divx encoding.

I encoded a 1GB, 30 minute, 23.976 fps, VOB file straight from DVD to a USB 2.0 thumb drive with VirtualDubMod in Fast Recompress mode. I did no resizing or filtering. I used Divx 6.6.1 on my Core 2 Duo E6300 (currently in your $150 to $200 price range). This was a 2.35:1 wide screen video encoded as a 16:9 DVD so there were black bars top and bottom. I used Divx aspect ratio setting to maintain the DAR. (A warning: many players do not repect the DAR setting in divx files so you may need to resize instead.) Divx was set to 1-pass quality based encoding with a quantizer of 3.

Divx Encoding Mode setting, encoding time, file size:

Fastest, 303 sec, 539 MB
Higher Performance, 341 sec, 480 MB
Balanced, 477 sec, 468 MB
Better Quality, 886sec , 462 MB
Insane Quality, ~1600 sec

I got bored and aborted the Insane Quality encode before completion so the encoding time is an estimate and I don't have a final file size. In my experience the increased compression it delivers over Better Quality isn't significant. Sometimes it even generates a larger file than Better Quality.

I repeated the "Fastest" encode with the VOB file on one hard drive and the output on another. It was 3 seconds faster.

A few notes on VirtualDubMod and reading a VOB from a DVD:

When VirtualDubMod opens a VOB it scans the entire file to build a list of all the key frames. It takes a few minutes to scan a 1 GB VOB file. Since I'm working on a 2GB computer, that 1 GB VOB file is fully cached in memory after the keyframe scan. This means during the actual conversion to Divx AVI the DVD isn't accessed at all. It's not even spinning!

[nerys]

wow !! 5 minutes to convert 30 minutes! was that start to finish or JUST conversion time IE from the time you opened Vdub till finished making divx file?

[jagabo]

5 minutes encoding time. For the full conversion add a few minutes to scan the VOB file when opened (the exact amount of time varies depending on and where on the DVD the the VOB is), and maybe a minute to select Divx and its settings.

Note that the VOB file I started with had 448 kbps AC3 audio and I retained that audio in the Divx AVI file. So about 100 MB of the files sizes I reported was the audio.

[nerys]

Will I see similar speeds using autogk? I really need to AUTOMATE the process. IE make it virtually idiot proof so others can do the same thing I do. DrDivx and AUtoGK are very close to idiot proof but autogk is VERY slow. Is there anway to make it use this "fast" mode you used or is there a similar alternative to autogk (automated and fast) but with more control on what it does? the file I did with autogk took nearly 8 fraking hours to convert a 2:21 minute movie! ouch! DrDivx would do that in 2 hours (if it was not being goofy on me grrrr)

[jagabo]

Will I see similar speeds using autogk?

No. You have a single core CPU, I was using a dual core CPU in that old post. You have an AMD XP 3500+ which I suspect is slower than a single core of a Core 2 Duo. AugoGK uses Xvid which is half the speed of Divx when both are at their fastest settings. I don't know if you can get AutoGK to use Divx instead of Xvid.

[guns1inger]

Yes, AutoGK will happily use Divx or Xvid, set from the Advanced Settings dialogue. If you have the full version of Divx it will happily use all 4 cores of a quad box. I can convert a 30 minute SD mpeg into Xvid with a 2-pass encode in under 15 minutes.

[jagabo]

Yes, AutoGK will happily use Divx or Xvid, set from the Advanced Settings dialogue.

How do you get that dialog?

[guns1inger]

The big button on the main screen under Step 4 marked Advanced Settings ?

[jagabo]

Heheh! I've never never seen the program. I was asking in case someone else had problems finding it. I keep hearing about settings that you can only get to via function keys.

[nerys]

its CTRL+F9 I will definately set that. I always thought xvid was faster DOLT I will try it again and see how fast it runs as divx! (that would explain why DrDivx is so fast)

When I said similar speeds I meant similar differences.

IE when "YOU" use Auto GK does it perform at a similar speed to whatever it is your using now? sorry for the confusion should have been more clear. I was wanting more a comparison of the programs not the computers.

[jagabo]

I typically use AviSynth and VirtualDub. AugoGK uses AviSynth and VirtualDubMod to do all the encoding. So I suspect you will see similar differences in speed between Divx and Xvid (I've never used AutoGK myself so I can't say for sure). Keep in mind there can be a several fold difference in encoding speed depending on the settings used within the codecs. Also, I'm running on a quad core CPU whereas you're running on a single core. Differences in multithreading quality may be responsible for some of the difference in encoding speed. For example, a single threaded encoder won't run any faster with four cores whereas a well multithreaded encoder could run nearlyfour times faster. The encoding times I posted were with multithreaded versions of Xvid and Divx.

[Stiiv]

You can have it fast, or you can have it look good.

I said that exact sentence to a client today, before I read gunsl1nger's post. lol

[TBoneit]

If you want speed spend the money and go Intel Quad core. I suggest Intel Quad as they run cooler than the AMD Quad.

I can have mine running encodes in batch mode for several hours and never hear any fans running as they stay running at slow speed. Fans are temperature controlled so they speed up as needed.
Silence is important as the computer sits next to the TV and when I'm encoding I switch the TV from computer monitor to TV and watch something else.

A quick look showed the Q6600 quad retail at $190, Mobo at $85, Memory would be $30 and up depending on what size, Video card cheap or get Mobo with built-in video for encoding built-in is good enough.

Total $300 to $400 reusing the case and drives from your old computer, Add $40 and up if you want a new case & PS.

Your time has a value too. The electric bill cost of running the computer longer needs to be factored in too.

[RabidDog]

Forget all that stuff and just buy 8gb cards ? why not pre-encode everything and store it on a central server.. then download the pron to each booth on Sunday?

[stiltman]

I have been using FairUse, but thought I'd try AutoGK again. I wanted to see the difference between file sizes and bitrates using the quality setting

Here's what I get with my Q6600 not overclocked

================================================== ==
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] AutoGK 2.45
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] OS: WinXP (5.1.2600).2
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Job started.
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Input file: F:\VIDEO_TS\VTS_03_0.IFO
Video info: MPEG2 720x480 NTSC 16:9 letbox PGC 1. Length: 2:05:53:20
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Output file: file.avi
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Output codec: XviD
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Audio 1: English AC3 6ch
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Subtitles: none
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Format: AVI
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Target quality: 90%
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Custom resolution settings: fixed width of 720 pixels
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Audio 1 settings: Original
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Standalone support enabled: MTK/Sigma
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Started encoding.
[10/1/2008 9:44:44 PM] Demuxing and indexing.
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Source resolution: 720x480
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Found NTSC source.
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Source aspect ratio: 16:9
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Source seems to be pure FILM.
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Output will contain 181289 frames
[10/1/2008 9:47:55 PM] Running single pass encoding.
[10/1/2008 10:16:17 PM] Duration was: 28 minutes 21 seconds
[10/1/2008 10:16:17 PM] Speed was: 106.53 fps.
[10/1/2008 10:16:17 PM] Job finished. Total time: 31 minutes 33 seconds